aaron.ballman added a comment. In D130689#3706424 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130689#3706424>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In D130689#3706377 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130689#3706377>, @thieta wrote: > >> In D130689#3706336 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130689#3706336>, >> @aaron.ballman wrote: >> >>> That's the only reason this hasn't been reverted already. Landing sweeping >>> changes on a weekend is a good way to reduce the pain, but we really need >>> to be sure someone watches the build lab and reacts when subsequent changes >>> break everything like this. >> >> Agreed, I think we need to update the protocol for changing the C++ standard >> in the future to account for more testing beforehand. I might push some >> changes to the policy document when all this has settled down to see if we >> can make sure it will be smoother the time we move to C++20. It's >> unfortunate that some stuff broke considering we where running some bots >> before it was merged and it didn't show any errors. And local windows builds >> for me have been clean as well. > > +1, thank you for thinking about how we can improve this process in the > future! Given that C++17 adoption across compilers has been far better than > C++20, I suspect the next time we bump the language version will be even more > of a challenge with these sort of weird issues. One thing I think would be a definite improvement is to have done an RFC on Discourse for these changes so that downstreams have a chance to weigh in on the impact. The patch was put up on Jul 28 and landed about a week later without any notification to the rest of the community who might not be watching cfe-commits -- that's a very fast turnaround and very little notification for such a significant change. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D130689/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D130689 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
